Researchers remind us that blocking notorious sites doesn’t really work

Banning the Pirate Bay in the Netherlands has accomplished little.

For four years now, most Dutch Internet users have had zero legal access to The Pirate Bay. (Other countries have since followed the Dutch example.) According to a new “working paper,” researchers have confirmed what most ISPs and Internet users figured out a long time ago: such bans are pretty pointless.

Survey data of over 2,000 Netherlands-based Internet users shows that only a tiny portion have changed their ways as a result of the official ban.

“Overall, between 4 to 6 percent of all consumers have decreased their downloading as a result of the blocking, whereas for 94 to 96 percent of the population the blocking has had no effect on their behavior,” the researchers wrote.

In short, those who were downloading illegally before have likely either found legal alternatives, are downloading through other channels (cyberlockers and the like), or have figured out how to use a VPN or another tool to circumvent the ban.

The team, which included academics from Tilburg University and the University of Amsterdam, concluded:

The fact that the consumer surveys observe less downloading decreases compared to consumers’ initial expectations, and the BitTorrent monitoring observing a decrease in market share of the ISPs affected by the first ruling that weakens over time, indicates that the market has returned towards the earlier equilibrium, with only very small structural effects. This is in line with a tendency found in the literature that the effect of legal action against file sharing often has an immediate effect which tends to fade out after a period of typically six months, as illegal supply and demand find other places to meet.

I always have to laugh whenever I see articles on TPB or their court case and how nothing has changed. You want to know how I found out about TPB? Articles like this one. Have I used them? Sure, but there are others that are a lot better, there have always been other sources. Taking down TPB, a tool used by a very small fraction of people sharing files, has had very little effect on file sharing because TPB was never a major player. Simply a tool used by those who share files. A tool like many others out there. And when you take a way a person tool, they go find another one.

Query: Who is this "us" you speak of? I think you mean 'them', the technically disinclined.

If you're referring to the title, I think it's fair to say that one can be reminded of things they already knew. I might even go out on a limb with the idea that preexisting knowledge is strictly necessary for a message to be a reminder.

The only thing it changed for me is that I now go to pirateproxy.net instead of thepiratebay.org.

That said, while the blockade has had zero effect on my ability to download, the increased availability of legal alternatives has had effect. I don't download any illegal music any more, but instead I use Spotify and occasionally buy an album on iTunes from my favorite artists.

For movies I now have a US Netflix account, which has reduced downloading substantially for me, although there are still a lot of movies you won't find on Netflix. Current TV shows are something I still have to download, as the legal alternatives are a joke, although I should perhaps look into getting a US Hulu account.

Pirate Bay has what people want. Easy, inexpensive access and sharing of media. You can't fight that. "Information wants to be free" has never been more clearly demonstrated. Pirate Bay has what you want, when you want it.

The various media portals (Netflix, Hulu, and their ilk) have *some* of what you want, maybe, unless the licensing has changed since you last looked, or unless the media conglomerate that owns the portal you're subscribed to is having a tiff with the media conglomerate that bought the film you want to see. Consumers are fed up with this maze of sites, and their inability to find what they want to watch. So, they go where they know they'll find it: Pirate Bay. Why is that so hard for the media companies to understand? Water flows downhill....

The challenge to the media organizations is to recognize this, and come up with a way to encourage it, while maiking a fair income from it.

Current TV shows are something I still have to download, as the legal alternatives are a joke, although I should perhaps look into getting a US Hulu account.

Save your non-US cash. Hulu hasn't progressed and is showing signs of getting worse. I don't have much hope for that service. The device-specific usage rules, shows getting dropped unexpectedly, and the terrible, repetitive ads are the highlights of the awful.

I always have to laugh whenever I see articles on TPB or their court case and how nothing has changed. You want to know how I found out about TPB? Articles like this one. Have I used them? Sure, but there are others that are a lot better, there have always been other sources. Taking down TPB, a tool used by a very small fraction of people sharing files, has had very little effect on file sharing because TPB was never a major player. Simply a tool used by those who share files. A tool like many others out there. And when you take a way a person tool, they go find another one.

Speak for yourself, I stopped downloading media the instant Metallica told me that Napster was evil.

Whereas a reasonable person would conclude from TPB's resilience in the face of a ban that internet censorship is a bad idea, the media giants probably see it as an opportunity to argue that we need even stronger laws.

I always have to laugh whenever I see articles on TPB or their court case and how nothing has changed. You want to know how I found out about TPB? Articles like this one. Have I used them? Sure, but there are others that are a lot better, there have always been other sources. Taking down TPB, a tool used by a very small fraction of people sharing files, has had very little effect on file sharing because TPB was never a major player. Simply a tool used by those who share files. A tool like many others out there. And when you take a way a person tool, they go find another one.

Speak for yourself, I stopped downloading media the instant Metallica told me that Napster was evil.

Post of the day...

Which reminds me--why isn't Titanium Dragon weighing in on this issue?

The device-specific usage rules, shows getting dropped unexpectedly, and the terrible, repetitive ads are the highlights of the awful.

I've never had a problem with device usage rules, since I have both an Xbox and a PS3. However, the comment about the ads is true. They have too few and will often play the same ones during every break in a program. If it's a particularly annoying ad, it gets grating very quickly.

If I never hear that "Prius for everyone" ad again, it will be too soon. It's enough to make me resistant to ever owning one.

Whereas a reasonable person would conclude from TPB's resilience in the face of a ban that internet censorship is a bad idea, the media giants probably see it as an opportunity to argue that we need even stronger laws.

When they learn that the torrenting scene is here to stay? There is no way to possibly stop it The war is lost. It is the War on Drugs, totally futile. Anyone thinking otherwise is living in a fantasy land.

...unless the media conglomerate that owns the portal you're subscribed to is having a tiff with the media conglomerate that bought the film you want to see.

While I hardly see eye to eye with them, the media conglomerates that you are bashing are the ones that made the media that you are breaking the law to get your hands on. There's no need to rationalize it; you want something that isn't yours and you don't want to pay for, so you steal it (and I do it too). You are not being victimized by Hulu because they make you type in your email and password or god forbid watch a 30sec commercial.

Just because pirating media is easier/cheaper/whatever than going through the proper channels doesn't give it any credibility.

No, its a matter of I have something I can share with friends who do not. And so I do.

...unless the media conglomerate that owns the portal you're subscribed to is having a tiff with the media conglomerate that bought the film you want to see.

While I hardly see eye to eye with them, the media conglomerates that you are bashing are the ones that made the media that you are breaking the law to get your hands on. There's no need to rationalize it; you want something that isn't yours and you don't want to pay for, so you steal it (and I do it too). You are not being victimized by Hulu because they make you type in your email and password or god forbid watch a 30sec commercial.

Just because pirating media is easier/cheaper/whatever than going through the proper channels doesn't give it any credibility.

That's not my point. Last month, there was a tiff between Time Warner and CBS. If you were a TW cusomer, there was no CBS programming available to you (even though you'd paid for it). When I wanted to watch all the old episodes of The IT Crowd, I went to Netflix and discovered that only the first season was available. AppleTV didn't have them either. Nor did Hulu+. WTF? Good thing I could download them from Pirate Bay.

I don't mind paying to watch shows. In fact, I'd rather pay $1-$2 for every show I watch, seriously. The problem is, I can't watch them, because, by some reasoning unclear to me, they aren't legally available. Perhaps they are, on some other subscription service, but I don't know which one, and I have to subscribe to find out they don't carry [insert media giant name here] shows.

Pirate Bay carries them all. Even Apple doesn't have the range of product they have. I'll happily pay $1 a download. I'll leave it to the media companies to do the math assuming they could buy Pirate Bay and charge $1/doenload. 50% of the people would probably pay it.

...unless the media conglomerate that owns the portal you're subscribed to is having a tiff with the media conglomerate that bought the film you want to see.

While I hardly see eye to eye with them, the media conglomerates that you are bashing are the ones that made the media that you are breaking the law to get your hands on. There's no need to rationalize it; you want something that isn't yours and you don't want to pay for, so you steal it (and I do it too). You are not being victimized by Hulu because they make you type in your email and password or god forbid watch a 30sec commercial.

Just because pirating media is easier/cheaper/whatever than going through the proper channels doesn't give it any credibility.

That's not my point. Last month, there was a tiff between Time Warner and CBS. If you were a TW cusomer, there was no CBS programming available to you (even though you'd paid for it). When I wanted to watch all the old episodes of The IT Crowd, I went to Netflix and discovered that only the first season was available. AppleTV didn't have them either. Nor did Hulu+. WTF? Good thing I could download them from Pirate Bay.

I don't mind paying to watch shows. In fact, I'd rather pay $1-$2 for every show I watch, seriously. The problem is, I can't watch them, because, by some reasoning unclear to me, they aren't legally available. Perhaps they are, on some other subscription service, but I don't know which one, and I have to subscribe to find out they don't carry [insert media giant name here] shows.

Pirate Bay carries them all. Even Apple doesn't have the range of product they have. I'll happily pay $1 a download. I'll leave it to the media companies to do the math assuming they could buy Pirate Bay and charge $1/doenload. 50% of the people would probably pay it.

LMFAO, assuming you could buy a single torrent search engine and start charging for downloads, is pretty stupid. Im not saying you are, you probably made that comment in jest, but buying TPB and trying to charge for downloads would be like buying Google and charging each search. Not only would it not work, youd basically be shuttering your site.

I am pretty sure you missed the ENTIRE point of his post

I look forward to pay for youtube channels. That could be really interesting change in dynamics where you literally only pay for the shows you want to watch.

I look forward to pay for youtube channels. That could be really interesting change in dynamics where you literally only pay for the shows you want to watch.

If I thought there was any chance the media congolmerates wouldn't screw it up, like they have every other attempt, I'd agree with you.

However, it's far more likely that shows won't be added if they exceed some degree of popularity, seasons won't be added until well after the broadcast date (and quite possibly the box set release date), will have some sort of odious advertising on shows you're already paying to watch, and pretty much every other way that has obviously already failed.

Which is the inherent problem here: whoever's been making these decisions is still trying to make internet-based distribution act like broadcast or cable distribution. It didn't work previously, but they just keep trying.

I have more hope in shows that Netflix and Amazon are producing, as they have no interest in current distribution channels.

When they learn that the torrenting scene is here to stay? There is no way to possibly stop it

The worst thing is that the tracking/analysis tools they already have set up (to produce reports like this) could make a collective licence system entirely viable: the user pays €X euros per month, which is then distributed between rightsholders based on the proportion of the user's downloading which involved their content. So if the monthly fee is €10 and half the user's downloading for August is Sony Records albums, then Sony Records gets €5 (less admin costs of course), which for both shareholders and artists is greatly preferable to the €0 they get under the current system.

As with many legislative actions, this law was less for actually stopping people from visiting Pirate Bay but for having something else to charge violators with on top of whatever else they've got charged with. A lot of "anti-terror" laws are like that.

When they learn that the torrenting scene is here to stay? There is no way to possibly stop it

The worst thing is that the tracking/analysis tools they already have set up (to produce reports like this) could make a collective licence system entirely viable: the user pays €X euros per month, which is then distributed between rightsholders based on the proportion of the user's downloading which involved their content. So if the monthly fee is €10 and half the user's downloading for August is Sony Records albums, Sony records gets €5 (less admin costs of course), which for both shareholders and artists is greatly preferable to the €0 they get under the current system.

Well the problem is if anyone set up anything like this the media companies wouldn't be able to use supply and demand to set outrageous prices for things that cost a few cents in storage cost...

And of course it would make sense and we wouldn't want that now would we... A constant stream of income from millions isn't what they believe in...

And me personally wouldn't be such a huge music lover (an buyer)without piracy... Now however I tend to use Spotify and buy a LP once in a while from my favorite bands (since Spotify pays crap to actual artists... The money goes primarily to the media companies...)if there would be an as good place as Spotify or its competitors or just "movie steam...". (or rather better since Spotify doesn't have it all...) for movies...

...unless the media conglomerate that owns the portal you're subscribed to is having a tiff with the media conglomerate that bought the film you want to see.

While I hardly see eye to eye with them, the media conglomerates that you are bashing are the ones that made the media that you are breaking the law to get your hands on. There's no need to rationalize it; you want something that isn't yours and you don't want to pay for, so you steal it (and I do it too). You are not being victimized by Hulu because they make you type in your email and password or god forbid watch a 30sec commercial.

Just because pirating media is easier/cheaper/whatever than going through the proper channels doesn't give it any credibility.

That's not my point. Last month, there was a tiff between Time Warner and CBS. If you were a TW cusomer, there was no CBS programming available to you (even though you'd paid for it). When I wanted to watch all the old episodes of The IT Crowd, I went to Netflix and discovered that only the first season was available. AppleTV didn't have them either. Nor did Hulu+. WTF? Good thing I could download them from Pirate Bay.

I don't mind paying to watch shows. In fact, I'd rather pay $1-$2 for every show I watch, seriously. The problem is, I can't watch them, because, by some reasoning unclear to me, they aren't legally available. Perhaps they are, on some other subscription service, but I don't know which one, and I have to subscribe to find out they don't carry [insert media giant name here] shows.

Pirate Bay carries them all. Even Apple doesn't have the range of product they have. I'll happily pay $1 a download. I'll leave it to the media companies to do the math assuming they could buy Pirate Bay and charge $1/doenload. 50% of the people would probably pay it.

If a media company bought TPB they would only have the content belonging to that company and would no longer "carry it all", but that's beside the point. The point I was getting at is that if something’s not for sale at the time/price/location you want it to be, that doesn't make it ok to steal it. Now I have made the decision many a time to pirate media, like you said it's both cheap and convenient, but that doesn't change things. The third season of the Upright Citizens Brigade was never released on VHS/DVD, but being a fan of the show I'd like to watch it at my leisure, but that does nothing to mitigate that fact that when I download it I am stealing it.

While I whole heartedly agree that by and large the entertainment industry and media conglomerates are to blame for the current state of affairs that doesn't give us a carte blanche to pirate. I guess what I am getting at is that: if it doesn't cost you any sleep then download all you like, but there's no need rationalize it and say 'they made me steal it'.

(Also, I've noticed that you haven't mentioned the two largest digital media outlets: iTunes and Amazon. If the only reason you pirate is because you can't find it legally you may want to look into these markets.)

I always have to laugh whenever I see articles on TPB or their court case and how nothing has changed. You want to know how I found out about TPB? Articles like this one. Have I used them? Sure, but there are others that are a lot better, there have always been other sources. Taking down TPB, a tool used by a very small fraction of people sharing files, has had very little effect on file sharing because TPB was never a major player. Simply a tool used by those who share files. A tool like many others out there. And when you take a way a person tool, they go find another one.

This. If they really want to shut down TPB all they have to do is fill it with so much chaff that people can't find the wheat and give up looking. There's usually two or three torrents for whatever you're seeking; if Hollywood posted hundreds of dead torrents then finding the good ones would be too much bother.Yes, I know this has been tried, but not very well. Hollywood doesn't understand the medium well enough to exploit it for their own purposes. Too bad for them.

The only thing it changed for me is that I now go to pirateproxy.net instead of thepiratebay.org.

That said, while the blockade has had zero effect on my ability to download, the increased availability of legal alternatives has had effect. I don't download any illegal music any more, but instead I use Spotify and occasionally buy an album on iTunes from my favorite artists.

For movies I now have a US Netflix account, which has reduced downloading substantially for me, although there are still a lot of movies you won't find on Netflix. Current TV shows are something I still have to download, as the legal alternatives are a joke, although I should perhaps look into getting a US Hulu account.

Netflix lets us watch movies on up to three devices at a time for $10/month. Hulu wants $10/month/device. Guess which company gets our $10.Edit to add that Netflix lets us use one account on up to three devices at a time from an unlimited pool of devices. Hulu wants $10/month/device - an account for my PC, an account for my wife's PC, an account for my tablet, and account for my wife's tablet...

I always have to laugh whenever I see articles on TPB or their court case and how nothing has changed. You want to know how I found out about TPB? Articles like this one. Have I used them? Sure, but there are others that are a lot better, there have always been other sources. Taking down TPB, a tool used by a very small fraction of people sharing files, has had very little effect on file sharing because TPB was never a major player. Simply a tool used by those who share files. A tool like many others out there. And when you take a way a person tool, they go find another one.

Speak for yourself, I stopped downloading media the instant Metallica told me that Napster was evil.

I downloaded their entire catalog when they said that, just for spite. Then I deleted it to free up the disc space because I don't listen to their crap. Wasn't as satisfying as burning the albums would have been, but it cost less.

The device-specific usage rules, shows getting dropped unexpectedly, and the terrible, repetitive ads are the highlights of the awful.

I've never had a problem with device usage rules, since I have both an Xbox and a PS3. However, the comment about the ads is true. They have too few and will often play the same ones during every break in a program. If it's a particularly annoying ad, it gets grating very quickly.

If I never hear that "Prius for everyone" ad again, it will be too soon. It's enough to make me resistant to ever owning one.

↓ Moderation: (show post)

People like you, who willingly pay to have ads forced upon them, are ruining the internet for the rest of us. Sod off.

People like you, who willingly pay to have ads forced upon them, are ruining the internet for the rest of us. Sod off.

Blunt, but I think I agree.

If we only support ad-free solutions (netflix, amazon?) they will prevail and have the ability to negotiate for more content. If we continue to support both (assuming we're paying about the same for both) the ad-showing services will have more money and therefore be able to offer producers more cash in the short-term for the content. If that larger content library allows them to choke out the ad-free solutions then we're stuck watching ads and it's cable TV all over again.